The Episcopal Diocese of Maryland has accumulated more than $2.1 million in conference-center operating deficits, another diocesan program has slipped into negative net assets, and roughly one-third of its active parish clergy are being paid below diocesan minimum standards. Meanwhile, questions persist about episcopal compensation, governance, and the personal integrity of Bishop Carrie Schofield-Broadbent.
The numbers come from the diocese’s 2026 convention journal, published ahead of its November 20–21 convention.
They paint an uncomfortable picture of an organization that can find money to cover recurring deficits but has a harder time ensuring its clergy receive the compensation standards the diocese itself established.
Claggett Center: $2.17 million in losses
The Claggett Center, the diocese’s conference and retreat facility, accumulated $2,165,721 in operating deficits between 2020 and 2025, according to the treasurer’s report.
In 2025 alone, Claggett recorded an $814,898 operating deficit. Guest revenue increased just 3.4%, while operating expenses rose 12.3%.
The final reported deficit was only $7,604, thanks largely to $488,019 in historic tax-credit income and $554,657 in investment gains, partially offset by interest expense.
That’s quite a financial makeover. Unfortunately, investment gains and historic tax credits aren’t substitutes for a sustainable operating model.
The diocese reports that approximately $6.1 million in Claggett-related debt was retired during 2025, including $3 million owed to the diocesan investment fund. That is welcome progress, as is the diocese’s assertion that restructuring is reducing operating losses.
But the underlying question remains: How long will diocesan resources be used to subsidize the center, and what measurable results will justify the expense?
Sutton Scholars: Another program in the red
The diocese’s Sutton Scholars youth enrichment program faces its own financial problems.
Its annual deficit rose from $74,504 in 2024 to $162,421 in 2025, an increase of approximately 118%.
Grants and contributions fell from $381,691 to $310,455, while net assets declined from a positive $52,201 to negative $110,220.
The diocese acknowledges that other diocesan funds have covered the deficits.
Sutton Scholars may provide valuable services. But worthwhile programs still require sound financial management, realistic budgets, and transparent explanations of their reliance on diocesan subsidies.
Good intentions don’t balance the books.
Meanwhile, one-third of active clergy are underpaid
Perhaps the most troubling disclosure appears in the convention journal’s Compensation and Benefits Committee report.
The committee found that approximately one-third of active parish clergy are not being compensated according to the minimum standards established by diocesan convention.
It also reports that three-quarters of the diocese’s smallest congregations cannot afford a full-time priest, leaving fewer than half of Maryland’s parishes served by full-time clergy.
These are not trivial problems. They raise fundamental questions about how diocesan leadership sets priorities, allocates resources, and supports the congregations that sustain the institution.
And what about Bishop Carrie’s compensation?
These financial disclosures come against the backdrop of Anglican Watch’s previously reported concerns about governance under Bishop Carrie Schofield-Broadbent, who became diocesan bishop in April 2024.
Her compensation deserves particular scrutiny.
As we have reported previously, compensation for bishops across the Episcopal Church has been rising substantially faster than compensation for clergy generally, particularly in the largest dioceses.
Whether Schofield-Broadbent’s own compensation has followed that trajectory should be established through disclosure of her actual salary, housing arrangements, pension contributions, benefits, and other remuneration, together with comparable figures for previous years.
The records reviewed for this article do not establish her individual year-by-year increases. That makes disclosure especially important.
At a minimum, diocesan officials should explain how episcopal compensation is determined, who approves increases, what independent review occurs, and how those decisions reflect the diocese’s financial condition.
There is something profoundly wrong with a church in which established minimum compensation standards are not being met for roughly one-third of active parish clergy, while leadership compensation remains difficult for ordinary members to evaluate.
Our concerns extend to the bishop’s personal integrity
But our concerns about Schofield-Broadbent go considerably beyond money.
Anglican Watch has previously raised serious concerns about her leadership, including what we regard as an autocratic approach to governance, troubling representations concerning diocesan authority, and a willingness to present contested institutional decisions as effectively settled.
Those concerns led us to question the wisdom of a possible merger between Maryland and the Diocese of Easton.
We also have serious concerns about Schofield-Broadbent’s personal integrity. In our view, integrity in episcopal leadership means more than avoiding criminal wrongdoing or financial impropriety. It requires candor, respect for legitimate governance structures, accountability for one’s decisions, and a willingness to acknowledge mistakes rather than simply invoke the authority of episcopal office.
We do not believe Schofield-Broadbent’s approach to governance has consistently demonstrated those qualities.
That is our editorial assessment, not a finding that she has personally misappropriated diocesan funds or committed financial misconduct.
Nor does the existence of diocesan deficits establish personal wrongdoing by the bishop. The legitimate questions are how she exercises oversight, whether diocesan decision-making is sufficiently transparent, and whether clergy and laity can challenge leadership without fear of adverse consequences.
For us, these are not academic concerns. A bishop exercises extraordinary influence over clergy careers, diocesan finances, institutional priorities, and the handling of misconduct complaints. Personal integrity is therefore an essential qualification for the office, not a desirable extra.
And when the diocese faces substantial financial challenges, questions about executive compensation and governance become all the more pressing.
A mitre is not an exemption from accountability.
Time for some answers
The diocese reports significant investment assets and says it has retired its external debt. Those are important qualifications. This is not evidence that Maryland is insolvent, nor do the reported deficits establish financial misconduct.
But substantial reserves do not excuse weak financial discipline or inadequate transparency.
Ahead of convention, Anglican Watch believes diocesan officials should explain:
- When Claggett Center will achieve sustainable operations without recurring diocesan subsidies.
- How Sutton Scholars will eliminate its deficit and restore positive net assets.
- Why approximately one-third of active parish clergy are paid below diocesan minimum standards.
- What Bishop Schofield-Broadbent’s complete annual compensation packages have been since 2023, and who approved changes.
- What independent oversight exists over episcopal compensation and executive decision-making.
- How the diocese ensures meaningful accountability for its bishop, including opportunities for clergy and laity to raise concerns without retaliation.
- Whether diocesan leaders intend to publish the completed 2025 audit and a detailed 2027 budget.
The diocese has resources. It has financial professionals. And it has a bishop whose office carries substantial institutional authority.
What it needs now is convincing evidence that those resources and that authority are being exercised with appropriate financial discipline and personal integrity.
Because balancing church budgets with investment income and internal subsidies is one thing. Demonstrating sustainable stewardship — and leadership worthy of trust — is quite another.
Sources
- Episcopal Diocese of Maryland, 2026 convention journal — Treasurer’s report, pages 65–69, documents Claggett Center’s operating deficits, Sutton Scholars’ financial position, endowment distributions, and debt repayment. The Compensation and Benefits Committee report, pages 42–43, discusses clergy compensation disparities.
- Diocese of Maryland, diocesan convention — Official convention information and materials.
- Anglican Watch: A shrinking church, a widening pay gap — Previous analysis of Episcopal bishop compensation trends.
- Anglican Watch: Reflections on the Diocese of Easton and its future — Earlier editorial criticism of Schofield-Broadbent’s governance and the proposed Maryland–Easton merger.
- Anglican Watch: Diocese of Easton looks north — Follow-up discussing Maryland governance concerns and alternative episcopal leadership arrangements for Easton.
